HS2 Plans...

[schenker]

"A major new station in the heart of London will be part of plans for a north-south high-speed rail line to be submitted to the government this week.
The first stage of the 250mph new line - from London to the West Midlands - could open by 2025."



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8432051.stm

 

[Proud Salopian]

Any chance of telling us where in London?

 

[schenker]

Take a guess, I doubt they even know

 

[Proud Salopian]

Probably Stratford or somewhere as useless as that.

To have a station in the (proper) heart of London (i.e. The City, the West End, etc) would mean it would be an underground one. Very, very costly.

And is it really planned to be 250mph?! I suspect that may be steadily toned down... to the more usual 186mph. And the 2025 date (which I see now only is for London-West Midlands) will slip too... and slip again... and again...

(You get my gist!)

 

[asylumxl]

HS2 only going to West Midlands = Waste of time and money

That's just my opinion though.

 

[schenker]

Well that was my thoughts of an underground terminal if it was going to be right in the heart of the city, I also had to do a double take on the speed its rather ambitious to say the least.


I'm still wondering how they are planning on funding this

 

[Proud Salopian]

They'll grow it. Magic beans and all that.

Look, it's not going to happen. End of. Tory government in next year, government budget to be balanced over the next few years, no public money for major new infrastructure schemes until the end of the 2010s, the private sector in no better state... etc etc.

The bureaucracy alone would kill it off, even if a pile of money was sitting there ready for it to happen.

 

[jon0844]

But Gordon Brown said he was going to unveil plans in March for huge spending on rail, building more high speed lines. He said it at the opening of the SET / HS1 service. He must mean it. I mean, he wouldn't lie would he?

He wouldn't say something to win an election would he? That would be sneaky. That's not what honest politicians do....

 

[Proud Salopian]

He's not going to be in power for much longer than March in any case...

 

[IanXC]

Looking at http://www.hs2.org.uk/about-hsr it seems the BBC have got the wrong end of the stick with the track being constructed to enable to up 250mph running...

The Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968490.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2) report that the recommendation will be for "a new 10-platform station between Euston and King’s Cross in London, and a new station in the centre of Birmingham."

The HS2 website states classic platform height as 915mm and High Speed as 760mm, is the reason for this just that the 760 is the French standard?

 

[route:oxford]

Should be an intresting read.

There are a reasonable number of opportunities for a new domestic HS line terminus in London

Just "hovering" over London on maps.google.co.uk

How about a new bridge over the Thames at Chelsea leading into a terminus built around Battersea Power Station...

 

[mallard]

The Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6968490.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2) report that the recommendation will be for "a new 10-platform station between Euston and King’s Cross in London, and a new station in the centre of Birmingham."

Between Euston an King's Cross? Isn't that St. Pancras? Just how many terminals can you have on Euston Road?

 

[asylumxl]

How about a new bridge over the Thames at Chelsea leading into a terminus built around Battersea Power Station...

I like that idea.

 

[CompactDstrxion]

Well the WCML was meant to be running at 140mph by now, which as we know with the 395s this government considers to be 'high-speed'.

This is basically a much more expensive way of accomplishing something similar to what was meant to have already happened.

Won't happen anyway. Labour will lose the next election and this is a cynical move to hit the Tories with early into the next government when it becomes obvious that the country can't afford it.

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Any chance of telling us where in London?

Understand Old Oak Common is the preferred site.

 

[Proud Salopian]

Understand Old Oak Common is the preferred site.

That's quite far out from the real central London, though I suppose it could be described as being in the "heart of London".

Surely the HS2 station would connect with the existing HS1 line and Crossrail?

 

[mrcheek]

He's not going to be in power for much longer than March in any case...

Which gives him the perfect opportunity to announce HS1, knowing it cant happen. Then when the Tory government has to announce that it cant happen as theres no money due to the financial crisis caused by Gordon Brown himself, Labour will attack Tory "cuts".

And when if fifty years HS1 is finally developed, some pathetic **** will say "of course, it was Gordon Brown who first suggested it you know"

On the subject of stations and termini (ouch. "terminuses" would sound better, if gramatically incorrect), didnt somebody recently suggest that the best way to do it would be to do away with Euston, Kings Cross and St Pancras, and build one giant super terminus on Euston Road, for all services north including HS1? The fact that we have major stations so close together is an anomaly of railway history anyway.

 

[devon_metro]

Perhaps we should fix what we've already got before embarking on red herring projects. The West Midlands has the WCML upgrade, didn't they spend enough money on that?

Lets electrify the GWML, build some new trains eg. an adequate order of 172s etc.

But yes, anything to win an election.

 

[johnb]

No, Euston Road is the preferred site, with OOC being a) nowhere b) daft.

We can afford a HSR. We can easily afford it, it's a tiny fraction of what we spend on silly wars and dole payments.

Hence, the current government is right to push it forward, and if the Tories decide to cancel it so they can cut their and their mates' taxes and buy bigger castles, then any criticism they get for cancelling it will be richly deserved.

 

[tsubaki]

No, Euston Road is the preferred site, with OOC being a) nowhere b) daft.

We can afford a HSR. We can easily afford it, it's a tiny fraction of what we spend on silly wars and dole payments.

Hence, the current government is right to push it forward, and if the Tories decide to cancel it so they can cut their and their mates' taxes and buy bigger castles, then any criticism they get for cancelling it will be richly deserved.

It amazes me that the government can - apparently - find money for this, but cant find a considerably smaller sum of money for reconnecting many towns to the rail network. One imagines there would be considerably more votes in reconnecting towns, as well as replacing far more car journeys than HS2 would.

 

[Proud Salopian]

I agree - the billions of pounds would be better spent re-opening lines, stations and such, as well as building urban rail systems, tramlines, etc (though not those bloody guided bus things!!) and improving/expanding the rolling stock in general. In summary a more general expansion of the railway infrastructure, which the majority of people would use. I really don't think such a small country as ours (geographically speaking) needs a 250mph railway line! Journey times are already pretty quick between the major cities in England, and the improvements needed are, for example, the re-opening of the Woodhead route.

 

[Death]

Personally, what I can't believe is that the HS2 website shows estimated HSR speeds in the year 2020CE to be 250mph...That's pretty pathetic for so-called "High speed rail", if ye ask me! :roll:

The other thing that I don't get is why the Government are "thinking" (That is to say "Creating a dirt-storm for the incoming Tory government") about piling billions of Pounds into building new HS lines - When for a fraction of the cost, they could simply order a large fleet of 370s and run them along the existing WCML?

OK, I appreciate that a 370 run to original BR standards along the WCML might struggle to match the 250mph suggested by the HS2 group...But even if those 370s are only run at 180mph in normal service (Before anyone says it: The recorded speed record for the 370 stands at 186.30mph) at least we would've got a decent and reliable MSR system for less than 5% of the cost of HS2...And bringing in a fleet of 370s for existing lines would eliminate the disruption and hassle normally associated with new builds, too! 8)

If nothing else, the improved journey times (EUS-MAN should take about 100 mins by APT, 35 mins less than the current Pendo runs) and the reduced cost of the "new" system would certainly be a winner in the eyes of the general public...And if anyone wanted to see about pushing the design of the APT a little further to achieve half decent HSR speeds of 400+mph, I'd be more than happy to provide advice and a willing "test pilot"...

 

[the sniper]

OK, I appreciate that a 370 run to original BR standards along the WCML might struggle to match the 250mph suggested by the HS2 group...But even if those 370s are only run at 180mph in normal service (Before anyone says it: The recorded speed record for the 370 stands at 186.30mph) at least we would've got a decent and reliable MSR system for less than 5% of the cost of HS2...And bringing in a fleet of 370s for existing lines would eliminate the disruption and hassle normally associated with new builds, too! 8)

And where would you slot freight and stoppers into this hypothetical timetable?

All along I've been against a High Speed Rail Network in the UK, I would suggest that if they're serious about spending that much money on rail then they should put it into de-rationalising the system; reinstating valuable rail links that haven't been lost to roads and housing, re-doubling and quadrupling lines that were cut down in the 60's, 70's and 80's, rebuilding stations (large and small) across the country that were built in the 1960's which look awful, offer poor facilities for passengers and often attract graffiti and antisocial behaviour. Finally, spend the money on new rolling stock, buying 172's to replace Pacers & 150's on lines that will most probably not be electrified in the next 40 years, and new EMU's for the newly electrified lines in the South West and North, as they don't deserve to have 20+ year old cast-off stock forced upon them while London (yet again :roll: ) get all the new gear.

Going back to HS2, if it does happen, I've yet to be told how they're going to force this thing through the Chilterns. I can see the hippies and up the tree's already... Britain is so unsuited to High Speed rail, it's ridiculous. The failure of this rail project is one I'm actually looking forward to.

 

[David]

In a country as compact as the United Kingdom, there is no real need for a high speed line, and there is definately no need for 2 to run between England and Scotland. No matter which route is used to get to Scotland, towns and cities will lose out.

The likes of France, Spain, Italy and Germany, and to a lesser extent Holland, Belgium, etc can build a network of high speed lines as they have the space to use. England doesn't.

To biuld a high speed line in the UK, there is a number of challenges and tough decisions to be made anyway.

• Where will the line start in London?
• Would a link to Heathrow be viable for international passengers?
• Which towns and cities will it serve?
• How will the line and stations be built in these towns and cities?
• Which city in Scotland will the line terminate at?

No doubt there is quite a few more questions that need to be answered as well.

What needs to be done however is a massive caacity increase across the whole network, not mainly in London and the South East. Quadrupling the ECML and WCML along the entire length and grade seperated junctions would add a lot of capacity for a start, with increases made elsewhere. Quadrupling lines where possible, re-opening lines that can also act as diversionary routes would be a good start.

 

[johnb]

@tsubaki which towns? In general, unless you've got a properly commutable (ie reliably 2tph minimum) service to a major city (Bristol/Brum/Manc/Liverpool/Sheffield/Leeds/Newcastle/Glasgow/Edinburgh) and/or a sub-3-hour service to London, the value of a rail link to a provincial town is negligible.

@Death we can't do that, because colour light signalling only allows for 200km/h, and we haven't yet managed to combine in-cab and colour light signalling in a way that safely allows both existing and new high-speed trains to safely use the same route.

When ECTS2 signalling is eventually fitted to the WCML, allowing speeds above 200km/h, 370s would still be a poor choice of train to use: because the WCML is bendy, having been laid in the 1840s, getting round the curves at any decent speed requires a train that tilts. And 300km/h just isn't going to happen with any kind of traction.

The 390s are designed for service at 225km/h, and have been clocked at 250km/h in testing, so if we were going to speed up the WCML then that'd be a better plan than using an obsolete batch of non-tilting trains designed for use on LGVs.

@thesniper most of the point about a HSL is about capacity - you add an extra high-capacity route, thereby freeing up room on the mainlines for semifast and commuter services. Doing it that way is cheaper than piecemeal upgrades, because it doesn't disrupt the functioning of existing railways (this is why the WCML upgrade was so expensive, because it had to work around a route that already existed and couldn't be long-term closed).

On the rolling stock, what, so you think we should scrap 20-year-old EMUs with another 20-30 years' life left in them? That doesn't seem very cost- or environment-friendly... (also, try travelling from London to Bristol. The refurbished 30-year-old stock on those trains is hardly the vilest in the world...)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The likes of France, Spain, Italy and Germany, and to a lesser extent Holland, Belgium, etc can build a network of high speed lines as they have the space to use. England doesn't.

90% of England is still unpopulated and undeveloped. I reckon we can find room, as long as we're happy for a few halfwitted NIMBY/BANANA types to be Tasered a bit.

 

[route:oxford]

• Where will the line start in London?
• Would a link to Heathrow be viable for international passengers?
• Which towns and cities will it serve?
• How will the line and stations be built in these towns and cities?
• Which city in Scotland will the line terminate at?

Where will the line start in London?

My choice is Battersea power station. Practicality suggests Kings X/St Pancras

Which towns and cities will it serve?

It will serve the major towns and cities on the route North.

How will the line and stations be built in these towns and cities?

To a very high standard. Usually at, adjacent, under, or over existing stations/lines.

Which city in Scotland will the line terminate at?

Perth, or maybe Stirling.

 

[generalvegitable]

Understand Old Oak Common is the preferred site.

there is no space there unless they want to build on kensal Green or wormwood scrubs park

 

[the sniper]

@thesniper most of the point about a HSL is about capacity - you add an extra high-capacity route, thereby freeing up room on the mainlines for semifast and commuter services. Doing it that way is cheaper than piecemeal upgrades, because it doesn't disrupt the functioning of existing railways (this is why the WCML upgrade was so expensive, because it had to work around a route that already existed and couldn't be long-term closed).

This is indeed one of the main benefits of the High Speed line, but imo, the negatives outweigh the positives.

On the rolling stock, what, so you think we should scrap 20-year-old EMUs with another 20-30 years' life left in them? That doesn't seem very cost- or environment-friendly... (also, try travelling from London to Bristol. The refurbished 30-year-old stock on those trains is hardly the vilest in the world...)

Are the 319's really good for 50 years? If they're that good why aren't they staying in London?

90% of England is still unpopulated and undeveloped. I reckon we can find room, as long as we're happy for a few halfwitted NIMBY/BANANA types to be Tasered a bit.

And the percentage of unpopulated and undeveloped land in the London to Birmingham/Manchester corridor is...? Good luck tasering your way through middle England. :roll:

Which towns and cities will it serve?

It will serve the major towns and cities on the route North.

Everything I've read suggests that the high speed line will call at very few intermediate stop, most probably non at all.

How will the line and stations be built in these towns and cities?

To a very high standard. Usually at, adjacent, under, or over existing stations/lines.

You missed the most important points, 'at great expense and inconvenience'.

 

[poshbakerloo]

I always thought they shud do an underground terminal in the centre of london. Maybe at Tottenham court road for cross rail?

 

[General Zod]

I've just been reading the post on the proposed HS2 plans and on going to their website read the FOI request for the "line of the route." HS2's take on the matter is that revealing this information is decremental to the public interest.

http://www.hs2.org.uk/publications/FOI-request-line-of-route-46481

The Sunday Times states that the line will be passing close to Tony Blair's luxurious Chilterns pile in Wotten Underwood. There must be much speculation amongst locals and enthusiasts regarding the exact line of route. Where could it puncture itself into the Chilterns ? The stretch of the Chiltern line between Haddenham and Bicester runs fairly close to Wotton Underwood and I was thinking if the topology and geography of the area would allow the two lines to be in such close proximity to each other ? I'm very much intrigued as to which route they will take out of Central London and where the line will enter into Buckinghamshire and then across to the Wotton Underwood area; via Aylesbury perhaps ? I cannot envisage it running parallel to the A40 / M40 .

gz